Alien27 wrote:Anyway back to CM, looking at those pics above of the latest ride over the SHB, I cant help but think it was counter productive. Really, taking over all the north bound lanes of the bridge at peak hour on a Friday evening? I would suspect the motorists caught in the jam behind them for a lot longer than normal aren't thinking 'wow look at that, what a nice sustainable way of commuting, I should try that'.

Alien27 wrote:Anyway back to CM, looking at those pics above of the latest ride over the SHB, I cant help but think it was counter productive. Really, taking over all the north bound lanes of the bridge at peak hour on a Friday evening? I would suspect the motorists caught in the jam behind them for a lot longer than normal aren't thinking 'wow look at that, what a nice sustainable way of commuting, I should try that'.

The other image issue I perceive from CM participants is that they would repeated mention that the ride was fun and enjoyable. Seriously, how many people join a protest for the fun of it? What kind of people have fun at the expense of others? That's a serious image and branding issue for CM in 2012.

Alien27 wrote:I also dont take offence or get defensive, when others deliberately choose not to ware, do, drive or ride something as they do not want to be associated with a tribe/image/stereotype.

Anyway back to CM, looking at those pics above of the latest ride over the SHB, I cant help but think it was counter productive. Really, taking over all the north bound lanes of the bridge at peak hour on a Friday evening? I would suspect the motorists caught in the jam behind them for a lot longer than normal aren't thinking 'wow look at that, what a nice sustainable way of commuting, I should try that'.

Its a rolling block thats about 4 minutes long, travelling nearly at the prevailing traffic speed. In all honesty due to the fact that the traffic will be blocked by chokepoints ahead, virtually all of those motorists lost less than that timewise. At that time its multiple traffic light cycles to get off at chatswood for the pac highway, and its multiple traffic cycles to get onto the epping road bit, which you can just drive up to at the speed limit, becaues there is 4 minutes of space made on the bradfield highway. ie timeloss is minimal, and since there are people in that rolling block, the bridge continues to ship as many people northbound as it usually does. Which is the point.

zero wrote:Its a rolling block thats about 4 minutes long, travelling nearly at the prevailing traffic speed. In all honesty due to the fact that the traffic will be blocked by chokepoints ahead, virtually all of those motorists lost less than that timewise. At that time its multiple traffic light cycles to get off at chatswood for the pac highway, and its multiple traffic cycles to get onto the epping road bit, which you can just drive up to at the speed limit, becaues there is 4 minutes of space made on the bradfield highway. ie timeloss is minimal, and since there are people in that rolling block, the bridge continues to ship as many people northbound as it usually does. Which is the point.

That's a most simplistic attempt at absolving blame. Most of us have seen it in real life traffic, it only takes a single point of slight delay to have a significant knock on effect that cascades to the back. With all four lanes delayed, the impact won't be just on those who are driving north. It'll undoubtedly impact on all traffic in and around the city. A rolling blockage of 4mins long is highly significant for peak hour traffic.

Going back to the photos. The other obvious point of note is the density of riders across the road. It has just invalidated the earlier argument that CM would increase the flow density of commuters across SHB.

sogood wrote:With all four lanes delayed, the impact won't be just on those who are driving north. It'll undoubtedly impact on all traffic in and around the city. A rolling blockage of 4mins long is highly significant for peak hour traffic.

Not what Victoria Police have said about traffic congestion when Melbourne CM have ridden along the Bolte Bridge and various other major arterial routes. Not at all what has been described

Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.

Alien27 wrote:Anyway back to CM, looking at those pics above of the latest ride over the SHB, I cant help but think it was counter productive. Really, taking over all the north bound lanes of the bridge at peak hour on a Friday evening? I would suspect the motorists caught in the jam behind them for a lot longer than normal aren't thinking 'wow look at that, what a nice sustainable way of commuting, I should try that'.

The other image issue I perceive from CM participants is that they would repeated mention that the ride was fun and enjoyable. Seriously, how many people join a protest for the fun of it? What kind of people have fun at the expense of others? That's a serious image and branding issue for CM in 2012.

Nice troll.

Not sure what is surprising about it. I enjoy riding a bike, its fun. I enjoy riding a bike with other like minded people, its fun. In this instance we are at a protest/demonstration/community event...whatever you want to call it. No one has said they just joined for the fun of it. Have you ever been to a protest or demonstration in support of a cause you believe in? Your average CM ride would not delay you any more than all the people in the rolling carpark who are single occupant/under 5km trip distance. You know, using their car to inconvenience others when there are other options available to them.

I guess you do no bunch riding either? Exercising on the road at the expense of others. Well if you do bunch ride I hope you are not having fun or enjoying yourself, we can't have that...image you see...

At the expense of others? To what extent are we talking about? Recreational riding, from loaded touring to pro level training bunches are seen as an inconvenience by some.Others think bikes do not belong on the road at all. Where do you fit in? Is there a time limit you can hold someone up before it becomes at their expense, care to share it with us?

Baldy wrote:At the expense of others? To what extent are we talking about? Recreational riding, from loaded touring to pro level training bunches are seen as an inconvenience by some.Others think bikes do not belong on the road at all. Where do you fit in? Is there a time limit you can hold someone up before it becomes at their expense, care to share it with us?

It's so common sense. At a time when mainstream cycling advocates are justifying the need to increase cycling to reduce traffic congestion, in comes CM to add to the congestion (needing police separation with general traffic) for the pleasure of the participating riders. Sorry, it does not equate.

We now have a rapidly developing dedicated cycling network (even on SHB). CM needs to update its objectives and methods in 2012!

Thanks for many people who have jumped to defence of my statements regarding image.

Alien27 wrote:We do the same with other groups, think commodore ute driving tradies. I work in the construction industry, drive a commodore ute, my wife drives a commodore sedan, I love motor sport, have a road and race motorbike in the garage and know that when I'm in traffic cyclists process the image I project, make assumptions and probably keep a weary eye on me. No biggie, I'm quite comfortable in my skin (commodore ute or lycra), I am aware of the images I project and I dont take offence or get defensive when confronted with any stereotype of me.

I admit I'm not excited by the commodore image. But I respect anybody who can recognise the image they are projecting and anybody who is comfortable it they own skin (particularly if it is a skin they change). Interestingly, just like Lycra being very practical for the purpose so is a commodore ute, it is a fantastic tool for a person working in the construction industry. Both are very practical but both do project a known image to the public.

warthog1 wrote:The inference I received from reading your comments and wasting a couple of minutes watching that silly video is that people wear lycra because of an image it projects.

You didn't laugh? You can't even recognise the road cyclist image? That''s a little ironic.....

warthog1 wrote:Here is a strava segment underlying my point nth Harcourt road. What would you suggest I wear while grovelling for the wheel of a NRS rider at 55km/h?

sogood wrote:And forfeiting the dedicated facilities made available solely for bikes. Yes, only in a democracy...

And I would have little worry with that happening, provided the Police were seriously prosecuting the road rules on motorists and cyclists, and there was a clear expectation that vulnerable road users have significant rights to space on the roads. Way back in about 1978 when the very first bike paths were just beginning to appear in parks and alongside some Melbourne main roads I said to friends that these were a backwards step for cyclists' place on our roads. I have not been proven wrong yet.

I see no irony in my post following your inane YouTube clip. I am not an apologist for the clothing I wear. if you cannot grasp that it is the bunch/group rides drawing the ire rather than the clothing then I am at a loss as to how to further illustrate the point.

From what I have seen of CM they are doing far more to alienate the driving public than any Lycra wearing bunch I have seen. Now there's a tribe I choose not to be a part of.

Because of the image?? Now what was it you were saying about image and what makes people ride bikes?

Anyway, about Sydney CM on that Harbour Bridge shot - they were all riding no more than two abreast per lane so their progress across the bridge was quite within the road rules. They were riding very reasonably. So many motorists have a driver's-eye view of the road rules, every now and then they should read them I reckon to brush up, like before doing their 5-yearly licence review

Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.

warthog1 wrote:I am not an apologist for the clothing I wear. if you cannot grasp that it is the bunch/group rides drawing the ire rather than the clothing then I am at a loss as to how to further illustrate the point.

Sigh.... Nobody is asking you to be an apologist. Nobody on these forums thinks less of you because of the clothing you wear. Nobody is asking you to not to wear Lycra. All that has been said is that Lycra projects an image. If you are slightly aware and honest to yourself surely you can see this. Similarly Alien27 recognises the image his commodore ute can project.

warthog1 wrote:I see no irony in my post following your inane YouTube clip.

Ok. I'll spell it out. The song takes the piss out of cyclists who simply focus on "Performance". You followed it up with a subtle bragging about your speeds reached and a link to Strava. Strava and the segment competitions epitomises the competitive and performance focus that is mocked in the song!

Edit. Not to mention the first seems to be about your bike! "I know you don't understand... How could I spend I spend five grand on a bike? You think that's absurd. Well there's only one answer, and there's only one word. It's PERFORMANCE."

(Again, nothing wrong with being fit, fast and competitive or using Strava. I'd much rather be fitter than I am. The are multiple ways of enjoying cycling and I enjoy most, but I certainly don't use Strava or wear skinny jeans. )

Last edited by human909 on Mon Dec 03, 2012 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.

human909 wrote:No but the clothes and helmets THEY need to wear are influential on THEM! The clothes I wear are obviously LESS influential on THEM! Surely and obvious statement?

Then wear nothing then. I'd challenge you to commute in normal clothes on a day like Saturday morning in Sydney without getting extremely overheated and sweaty. In very warm and humid weather, the proper cycling gear (jerseys, etc) is much nicer to wear for that reason only.

human909 wrote:I was a confused and puzzled... And then it dawned on me.

(PS. I don't ride brooks. I ride on a regular road saddle without nicks.)

For what it's worth, why CM couldn't just take the left lane as anyone else would? They are only doing us all a great load of damage. Now everyone else who doesn't ride a bike has proof that we are all like those people in the photos above.

For what it's worth, why CM couldn't just take the left lane as anyone else would? They are only doing us all a great load of damage. Now everyone else who doesn't ride a bike has proof that we are all like those people in the photos above.

It's trying to prove a point. Zero's explanation of the rolling block really does improve traffic flows, and if you cannot focus on your overall travel time in a car, then you shouldn't be driving.

Has anyone noticed on a commute that much of your overall time difference is governed by lights, and NOT traffic? I can cover my 20.5km inbound commute in 39 minutes without dangerous speed on the bike, it will often take me 50. I have 10 lights in the first half, and then virtually nothing for the rest. My commute speed is based on the first half. I can't ride hard enough to make up the time difference in the second half. Cars are no different. I have my opinions about red lights because they are the biggest time waster we face on the road.

Critical mass is simply highlighting the incredible short sightedness of focussing on the car, rather than the commute. I'vce noticed major traffic ways are being subjugated to buses and trams. This is initially stupid, until you realise that the car has already maxed out the road in peak hour. You have to incentivise noncar options so that your decision to do a positive thing isn't made impossible. I think the poor light sequences of the bike paths fall into this category. Maximum speed isn't the key to your commute. It is average speed. A CM rolling road block isn't hurting your average speed. The every day peakhour rolling roadblock of cars is. Drive at 2am at you'll quickly realise that the cars are the problem

I agree with you on that totally on the problem being cars, but the point is that it is making us all look bad. I ride a bike, and so now I'm one of those lycra-louts who blocks traffic on the harbour bridge traffic lanes according to Mr Joe or Mrs Josephine Public.. When I'm not at all.

Giving people incentives to ride a bike to work is a great idea, but it just isn't happening fast enough in parts of my city apart from pockets of good-work here and there. Otherwise it's just a tiny bit of the road-edge painted to be a bike-lane or a bike-lane on the left which cars park in, blocking it completely.

I don't believe that Critical Mass is going to improve things by the kinds of rides they do, it just polarises opinions and makes car drivers more angry. Rather than bringing them around to our way of thinking, it just reinforces their beliefs and makes them even more determined to cut us off, run us up the gutter, throw batteries at us, assault us or knock us over causing serious injury.

I don't travel in a car to work, I use a train. People have to look at these other options, the city cannot take more cars on the road, it is at breaking point already. I'd ride to work myself, but for the fact I really don't feel safe on the roads I'd need to take and my commute would be closer to 40km each way. So I just do my riding for enjoyment on places like the M7.

sogood wrote:Going back to the photos. The other obvious point of note is the density of riders across the road. It has just invalidated the earlier argument that CM would increase the flow density of commuters across SHB.

The SHB has a hill, the cycles will spread out as they accelerate down it. The camera is well after the crest and is thus showing the spreading.

A cycle takes 5 minutes to do the 2.5kms (including approaches), and all vehicles slow to below cycling speed at that time through the approaches - ie the critical area is not over the bridge, the place where people stop is on the approaches, where the cycles are extremely compact and person dense. Afaik the ride only used one road on the approach thus would have been extremely effective in the critical area. The drivers should be about 2.5 minutes delayed, with open road ahead of them on the Bradfield highway, where they will then do the speed limit until they hit the back of the traffic queue they started from.

and no, by 6:30pm the worst of the crush in the city is over anyway. This is easily seen by the fact that Anzac bridge traffic queues rise from 5:15pm and peak at 6pm, and are cleared by 6:30pm.

If they were being deliberately obstructive, rather than deliberately demonstrative they'd run the ride at 5:30pm as the queues are rising.